– DRAFT –
ixml community group

Agenda - summary of open issues

<Steven> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/18

Issue #18 (rule names and XML names) - Steven - now done - CLOSED

Issue #20 (Grammars to accept and reject) - Steven - should now be pushed to GIT hub.
… Done - CLOSED

<Steven> https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/20

Issue #21 - done - CLOSED

Issue #23 - same as #21 - Done - CLOSED

Issue #25 - in progress

Issue #31 - Done - CLOSED

Issue #33 - Done - CLOSED

Issue #47 (Well formedness) - Done - CLOSED

Issue #48 ('s' and 'S' - optional and required whitespace) - Steven - will update

Bethan: some accessibility issues for upper and lower case differences
… Wil open an issue

Issue #53 (Tmarks) - Done - CLOSED

Issue #50 (Characters or octets) - Steven believes it is covered by explicit UTF - Done - CLOSED

Issue #57 ('s' missing in set, between and after members)

ACTION: Steven: solve Issue #57

Issue #59 - (Double operator in separator operator - '**', '++') - Steven happy either way

Norm: Syd Bauman reviewed and said yes. General agreement that it is probably a good idea to avoid overloading the '*' or '+' operators

All agreed that it has consensus

ACTION: Steven: implement '**' and '++' as separator infix operators

Issue #44 (Error message/code proposal)

ACTION: Norm: Add the error code linkages to the spec.

Issue #61 (Errors in a namespace) - we should specify that the ixml namespace must be used if a namespace is required

ACTION: Norm: to add prose to this effect

Issue #58 ( Pull request for test cases - added some that succeeded!)

Dropping Pragmas for Version 1

Agreed that pragma inclusion is to be dropped for version 1, given that timescales are pressing and we really don't want to rush through topics that need a careful study

ACTION: Tom: start email discussion on namespaces for the coming week

Insertions

Norm: Strong preference for using + as the character for insertion

<Steven> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ixml/2022Mar/0015.html

https://github.com/invisibleXML/ixml/issues/60

Steven: '^' worked just as well and implies insertion... and implies insertion....

Norm: happy to go with the flow.

Bethan: some notion of set negation....

<norm> Clearly we should use insertion: ⎀

Bethan: Any reason not to use '&' - but of course it would be ugly in XML

ACTION: Steven: Add insertions in the specification

Scribe for next meeting: JL